Neeliofar Shiekh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 2753 of 2019 Neeliofar Shiekh, W/o late Saiyyad Sahid, aged about 28 years, R/o Near Das NAI, Shantoshi Nagar, Police Station Tikrapara, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur (CG). ---- Applicant

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh, through Station House Officer, Police Station Purani Basti, District Raipur (CG). ---- Non-applicant For Applicant : Mr. Ashish Surana & Mr. Ankit Borkar, Advocates For Non-applicant : Ms. M. Asha, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board 08.05.2019 1.

This is the second bail application filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the applicant, who has been arrested in connection with Crime No.13/2019 registered at Police Station Purani Basti, District Raipur for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 5 & 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

2.

The first bail application of the applicant was rejected on merits by this Court vide order dated 07.03.2019 passed in M.Cr.C. No.1291/2019.

3.

Case of the prosecution, in brief is that CSP Purani Basti, Raipur had received an information from informant on 14.01.2019 that applicant who was living in rented house running the prostitution business by calling the girls from outside. A raid party was constituted. Hemant Thakur was the pointer. Three notes of Rs.500/- denomination, number 2VF934119, 2EG99715 and 5GA938399 have been given to pointer. Pointer Hemant Thakur had gone to the house of applicant. Co-accused Farooq Khan met him and agreed to provide girl to him. Pointer had given Rs.1500/- to the co-accused Farooq Khan. In that house applicant and another co-accused Sangeeta Shah were also present. From the possession of co-accused Farooq Khan same numbered notes were seized.

4.

Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is in jail since 14.01.2019 and there is no material showing that the applicant was living in a rented house and running prostitution business hence he may be released on bail.

5.

On the other hand, counsel for the State opposed the bail application. She further submitted that similar type of one case has been registered against the applicant in police case diary. 6.

Looking to the above mentioned facts and circumstances of the case and looking to this fact that there is no change in the circumstances of the case on the strength of which the applicant be released on bail in the second round of litigation. Consequently, the second bail application of the applicant is rejected. 7.

Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) JUDGE L/-